Well, I have eventually got it downloaded in installed. Now I can understand everyone's concerns!

I have a mid system (6700k + GTX1080), so I did a test before and after installation.

With PMDG 747 and EGLL from A/Soft. From Gatwick to Heathrow. Skyforce and  AS weather.

Before: 15-25 fps with FPS locked at 25. quite smooth quite acceptable.

After: 12-19 with FPS locked at 20. Mixed results. Most buildings quite sharp, quite a few not so sharp. Water excellent!

Biggest let down was roads: most appeared to be covered in grass (or green asphalt, as in Tennis court). Quite a few stutters.

Autogen buildings around London fine. However,in Southampton buildings completely inaccurate.

I will have to experiment with settings as suggested here but a bit disappointing at the moment.

Ian Harrison

hmmm...... looks like i stay with openlc EU more than enough and no performance issue----

5 hours ago, DellyPilot said:

For anyone struggling, I have after nearly 8 hours worked it out.

Incredibly it seems they only bothered to define 2 levels of Scenery Complexity. Sparse and Extremely Dense and nothing in between! 

@F737NG thanks for the tip that makes perfect sense because ORBX never bothered to create graduated levels of scenery complexity, so removing those types of building is like making your own 'inbetween' setting.

To run with NORMAL (= EXTREMELY DENSE) on even the fastest octa core PC you have to dial every other CPU setting down to 0. That is why people are struggling. 

If you go with SPARSE like I have now then you can put other Auto gen sliders up and still fly around London without stutters. The country side still looks nice.

Really poor from ORBX and not even helpful on their forums, just comments like 'oh you probably need to optimise Windows 10 and stop trying to max out your sliders' aimed at me from the CEO. Unimpressed. I have been doing unpaid beta testing for them. 

Anyway I now can get nice smooth performance at 30FPS but good god what a mission! 

https://orbxsystems.com/forum/topic/167918-te-gb-south-p3d-v4-stutteringslowing-performance-issue/?do=findComment&comment=1477492]

I tried this and, yes it is much better but there are no terminal buildings at London City!

5 hours ago, DellyPilot said:

comments like 'oh you probably need to optimise Windows 10 and stop trying to max out your sliders' aimed at me from the CEO. Unimpressed. I have been doing unpaid beta testing for them. 

No surprise at all.

I was really excited when I first heard of this scenery in the grapevine. Especially when LM had finally sorted out the issue with poor photoscenery loading. However, I have no intention of paying good money to experience the kind of problems many are reporting. It's crazy that we are expected to drop sliders to silly levels to actually get a product to perform anything half decent. 

13 minutes ago, Rockliffe said:

It's crazy that we are expected to drop sliders to silly levels to actually get a product to perform anything half decent. 

That's the essence. In addition, the global accusion of badly optimized Win 10 is inappropriate given most of us can run all other scenery (including ORBX scenery, maybe minus Orlando) trouble-free.

They either will remedy this - or it will fail.

Kind regards, Michael

Just now, pmb said:

That's the essence. In addition, the global accusion of badly optimized Win 10 is inappropriate given most of us can run all other scenery (including ORBX scenery, maybe minus Orlando) trouble-free.

They either will remedy this - or it will fail.

Kind regards, Michael

Hi Michael, like many others, I have been an ardent supporter of Orbx sceneries for a long time and I have seen how they have developed from a small team of developers to a large concern who have established themselves as being one of the leading providers of sceneries for flight simulation. I really do hope they are not going to end up like a certain retailer who offer sub par support for their sceneries by simply brushing off accusations of poor performance with statements such as, "rebuild your cfg," "drop your slider settings" "have you tried adding (such a) tweak" etc etc...😥 

Reading the posts it seams to me that TE GB South is "just" an bad port from the XP version.

That would be very sad, because that leads me to the impression that ORBX main goal at the moment is to milk the somehow "payware awakend" XP crowd so maybe profit is more important at the moment than deliver clean products.

Edited February 11, 20197 yr by JoeFackel

41 minutes ago, Rockliffe said:

I was really excited when I first heard of this scenery in the grapevine. Especially when LM had finally sorted out the issue with poor photoscenery loading.

These were my thoughts exactly, it’s a shame but deep down I was sort of expecting something like this. They say a good workman shouldn’t blame his tools , but I can’t help feeling that in this case perhaps Orbx would be justified in doing so. I don’t pretend to understand the inner workings of simulation but it would seem that P3D heritage is limiting what is achievable.

On the plus side I have the 3  orbx TEGB volumes in x plane and I have been able to blast low level down Welsh valleys at 420kts in the JF hawk with no blurred textures or stutters , and fly the flyjsim 737-200 at 500 ft VFR up The Thames through central London with smooth FPS. Neither of those things I ever though I’d see achievable in a sim.

I would have liked to have done similar with my P3D aircraft but I think I’ll keep my orbx regions in place for now or perhaps look at the JF scenery demo.

Orbx has reached the limit for prp3d to handle all their scenery's along time ago and they know it, They have turned to xplane for more Illuminati and know that xplane can handle it, i have 90% of their scenery and now i can only use 40%

 

In my view, it is the P3D graphic engine that can't handle the photo scenery TOGETHER with massive amount of custom 3d objects and autogens. The TE Great Britain series in XP has no performance issue.

If I am correct the TE series are made for XP and then ported over to P3Dv4.

If LM would optimize P3D for better fps and more smoothness they would need to rebuilt the engine and there probably would be no compatibility at all with current addons ...

Saying that P3D cannot handle things but Xplane does is utterly nonsense, you cannot compare how one add-on behave inside XP and P3D like for a like, specially when both products are developed totally differently.

For an instance:

• XP is always done in PBR, so has ORBX designed TE GB as PBR for P3D? which of course has much better handling of light calculations and therefore better performance?
• XP has way much less number fo autogen buildings, the number of autogen building for P3D is around 7,000 or more. so both simulators will behave differently with the same scenery and accordingly the settings for scenery complexity for P3D needs to be tested and adjusted if necessary. 
• Both platforms SDK are totally different, add-on's are developed totally differently, so products are totally different.. cannot be compared.
• TE Netherlands works just fine, so it pops the question what happened to TE GB?

Just my 2cents..

S.

 

Edited February 11, 20197 yr by simbol

7 minutes ago, GSalden said:

If I am correct the TE series are made for XP and then ported over to P3Dv4.

Correct. 

Both are using the same datasources, same aerial imagery, same landmarks etc. Of course there are limitations in the different sims that mean things are done/look different, but for the most part it's the same scenery

 

So, what is your viewpoint with respect to the apparent performance problems of TE GB South in P3D, Tony? An i9 9900k @ 5Ghz/2080Ti powered system should be able to run it very well, particularly as TE Netherlands works just fine for a wide range of systems. To be honest, all of the comments in this thread are making me even more interested to see just how well (or badly) it runs on my own Windows 7 64bit PC. On paper, I do not have a chance in hell.....but then I fly with clear skies and no wind, and at 1920x1080 resolution on a single monitor.

Edited February 11, 20197 yr by Christopher Low